federal register August 20,1997 Wednesday Proposed Rule Prohibition ofOxidizersAboardAircraft; 49 CFRParts171,172,and175 Administration Research andSpecialPrograms Transportation Department of Part V 44373 44374 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 20, 1997 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 267–8166, Federal Aviation exceptions from HMR requirements for Administration, U.S. Department of classification, approval and description Research and Special Programs Transportation, 800 Independence of oxygen generators when shipping to, Administration Avenue, SW., Washington DC 20591. from or within the U.S. under the provisions of international or Canadian SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 49 CFR Parts 171, 172, and 175 regulations; (4) specify packaging [Docket No. HM±224A; Notice No. 97±8] I. Background requirements for shipment of chemical oxygen generators; and, (5) eliminate an RIN 2137±AC92 On December 30, 1996, RSPA published a notice of proposed exception in § 175.10(a)(24) pertaining Prohibition of Oxidizers Aboard rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal to personal chemical oxygen generators Aircraft Register (61 FR 68955) proposing to carried by passengers in checked amend the Hazardous Materials baggage. AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR parts 171– RSPA received requests from two Administration (RSPA), DOT. 180) to prohibit the carriage of airline industry associations to ACTION: Supplemental notice of oxidizers, including compressed withdraw the proposed rule and not proposed rulemaking. oxygen, in passenger-carrying aircraft. issue the supplemental NPRM. These This proposal also would have the effect requests are denied. RSPA also received SUMMARY: On December 30, 1996, RSPA of limiting packages of oxidizers that are several requests to extend the comment proposed to amend the Hazardous allowed on cargo aircraft to locations period on the December 30, 1996 NPRM Material Regulations to prohibit the accessible to crew members (see for either 60 or 90 days. These requests carriage of oxidizers, including § 175.85(b)). In the December 30, 1996 were not granted. However, RSPA has compressed oxygen, aboard all NPRM, RSPA analyzed the prohibition accepted all late-filed comments to the passenger-carrying aircraft. The effect of of oxidizers in Class D cargo NPRM and, by issuing this this prohibition would be to limit compartments only, and it proposed a supplemental NPRM, RSPA is oxidizers to accessible locations on new § 175.85(d) to prohibit loading or effectively extending until October 20, cargo aircraft. The December 30, 1996 transporting in a Class D compartment 1997 the period for comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking analyzed any package containing a hazardous proposal in the December 30, 1996 Class D cargo compartments and material for which an Oxidizer or NPRM to prohibit the transportation of indicated that a supplemental notice Oxygen label is required. RSPA also oxidizers, including compressed would be published to analyze Class B stated that it planned to issue a oxygen, on board passenger-carrying and C compartments. This supplemental supplemental NPRM further analyzing aircraft. RSPA is denying the requests notice specifically analyzes the the prohibition of oxidizers aboard for an extension of time to comment on prohibition of oxidizers in other than passenger-carrying aircraft in Class B the proposals in the December 30, 1996 Class D cargo compartments. The and C cargo compartments. This is the NPRM pertaining to chemical oxygen proposed requirements would apply to supplemental NPRM to which RSPA generators, other than for the proposed foreign and domestic aircraft entering, referred. If the proposal to completely removal of § 175.10(a)(24). Sufficient leaving, or operating within the United prohibit the transportation of oxidizers time has been provided to comment on States. The purpose of these proposals on passenger-carrying aircraft and limit the generator-related proposals, and is to enhance air transportation safety. their transportation on cargo aircraft to RSPA issued a final rule on these DATES: Comments must be received by accessible locations is adopted, by proposals which was published in the October 20, 1997. adding the word ‘‘Forbidden’’ in Federal Register (62 FR 30767) on June ADDRESSES: Address comments to the Column 9A of the Hazardous Materials 5, 1997. Also, RSPA issued an extension Dockets Unit, Research and Special Table in § 172.101 for those materials of effective date and corrections to the Programs Administration, U.S. for which an Oxidizer or Oxygen label June 5, 1997 final rule on June 27, 1997 Department of Transportation, room is required, RSPA would not adopt the (62 FR 34667). 8421, 400 Seventh Street, SW., proposed § 175.85(d), which would On May 31, 1996, the National Washington, DC 20590–0001. prohibit the carriage of these materials Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Comments should identify the docket in Class D compartments only. issued two recommendations to RSPA, number and be submitted in five copies. The December 30, 1996 NPRM also the following of which is pertinent to Persons wishing to receive confirmation proposed several amendments to this discussion: of receipt of their comments should provisions in the HMR concerning In cooperation with the Federal Aviation include a self-addressed, stamped chemical oxygen generators. These Administration, prohibit the transportation of postcard. The Dockets Unit is located in proposed amendments were discussed oxidizers and oxidizing materials (e.g., nitric the Department of Transportation in Part VII of the preamble to the acid) in cargo compartments that do not have headquarters building (Nassif Building) December 30, 1996 NPRM and, in fire or smoke detection systems. (Class I, at the above address on the eighth floor. summary, would: (1) Add a shipping Urgent Action) (A–96–30) Public dockets may be reviewed there description for ‘‘Oxygen generator, This NPRM was developed by RSPA between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 chemical,’’ consistent with the recent in cooperation with the FAA. The p.m., Monday through Friday, except adoption of this shipping description by actions proposed herein go beyond the Federal holidays. the International Civil Aviation NTSB recommendation and are based FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Organization (ICAO); (2) indicate in on a preliminary assessment by RSPA Diane LaValle, Office of Hazardous §§ 172.101 (the Hazardous Materials and the FAA of the hazards posed by Materials Standards, (202) 366–8553, Table) and 171.11 that chemical oxygen oxidizers aboard aircraft. In its Research and Special Programs generators may not be transported recommendation, NTSB cited three Administration, U.S. Department of aboard passenger-carrying aircraft or in previous incidents in which oxidizers Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., inaccessible cargo compartments in caused fires aboard aircraft. In each of Washington DC 20590–0001; or Gary cargo aircraft; (3) indicate in §§ 171.11, these incidents, there were apparent or Davis, Office of Flight Standards, (202) 171.12, and 171.12a that there are no known serious violations of the HMR. Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 20, 1997 / Proposed Rules 44375

Although RSPA and FAA are not aware In the absence of a fire caused by will be forbidden to be transported on of any fire aboard an aircraft having another source, oxidizers currently a cargo aircraft in an inaccessible cargo been caused directly by transport of authorized for air transportation and compartment (e.g., a Class C or D cargo oxidizers in conformance with the offered in conformance with the HMR compartment) or in an accessible cargo HMR, RSPA and FAA agree that present minimal risks to aircraft, crew compartment in a manner which oxidizers may pose an unacceptable risk and passengers. Most oxidizers will not renders the oxidizer inaccessible. when transported aboard passenger- initiate fires when spilled or released, There are certain hazardous materials carrying aircraft and when transported but they will intensify fires originating which may be listed in the Hazardous aboard cargo aircraft in locations from other sources. The potential hazard Materials Table as ‘‘Forbidden’’ on inaccessible to crew members. posed by these oxidizers in an aircraft passenger-carrying aircraft but which Both the NTSB’s recommendation and cargo compartment is that, if a fire were may be permitted on passenger-carrying this proposed rule address risks that do to occur elsewhere in the compartment, aircraft under the provisions of not depend on or involve any violation the fire may involve the oxidizer, and exceptions elsewhere in the HMR, such of requirements currently in the HMR most oxidizers would then provide an as for compressed oxygen as proposed regarding the transportation of oxygen-enriched environment which in this notice. RSPA is proposing a oxidizers. For that reason, RSPA and could intensify the fire and override the minor change to § 175.85(b) to clarify FAA disagree with opinions that better safety features of the compartment. that any package bearing a Cargo enforcement of the HMR would be When transported by aircraft, an Aircraft Only label must be stowed sufficient to eliminate the risks present oxidizer is subject to per package accessibly on cargo aircraft, even though in transporting oxidizers on board quantity limits specified in the there may be specific exceptions passenger-carrying aircraft. Hazardous Materials Table, and to elsewhere in the regulations which aircraft quantity limits specified in allow the material on passenger-carrying II. Oxidizers Under the HMR § 175.75. For oxidizers forbidden aboard aircraft under certain conditions. Under the HMR, an oxidizer (Division a passenger-carrying aircraft but The December 30, 1996 NPRM 5.1) is a material that may, generally by permitted aboard a cargo aircraft, discussed the classification of cargo yielding oxygen, cause or enhance the packages must be labeled (see compartments into five categories, combustion of other materials (see 49 § 172.101(j)(4)) with the Cargo Aircraft Classes A, B, C, D, and E (see 14 CFR CFR 173.127). Hydrogen peroxide, Only label specified in § 172.448 and, 25.857), as defined for transport swimming pool chlorine, bleach and under the provisions of § 175.85(b), category aircraft in FAA’s Federal oxygen are examples of commonly used must be loaded in a manner so that they Aviation Regulations (FAR). Although oxidizers. Liquid and solid materials in are accessible to a crew member during these categories are also referenced in Division 5.1 are subdivided into Packing flight. the following paragraphs and elsewhere Groups I, II, or III, a relative ranking in this preamble, it should be noted that corresponding to high, moderate or low IV. Prohibition of Oxidizers on the proposals in this supplemental risks posed by the material. Packing Passenger-carrying Aircraft and in NPRM address all aircraft without groups are assigned to specifically Inaccessible Locations on Cargo regard to whether they are transport named materials in the § 172.101 Aircraft category aircraft or not. Thus, this Hazardous Materials Table (Table). For In the December 30, 1996 NPRM, proposal would prohibit oxidizers in generic entries, such as ‘‘Oxidizing RSPA proposed to prohibit the loading cargo compartments of all transport solid, n.o.s.’’ (‘‘n.o.s.’’ means ‘‘not or transportation aboard a passenger- category and nontransport category otherwise specified’’), packing groups carrying aircraft of any package for aircraft used in passenger-carrying are assigned on the basis of test results. which an Oxidizer or Oxygen label (see service. Certain gases (Class 2), most notably §§ 172.405 and 172.426) is required oxygen, are also oxidizers under the under subpart E of part 172. Consistent Class B Compartments on Passenger- HMR and, even though they are not with that proposal, in this supplemental Carrying Aircraft classed as such, they are required to be NPRM, RSPA proposes to revise A Class B compartment is one: (1) To identified with the OXIDIZER or Column 9A of the Hazardous Materials which any part of the compartment is OXYGEN label. Table, pertaining to quantity limitations accessible in flight to a crew member on passenger aircraft, to read with a hand held fire extinguisher; (2) III. Oxidizers Aboard Aircraft ‘‘Forbidden’’ for every shipping from which no hazardous quantities of Liquid oxidizers in Packing Group I description that requires an Oxidizer or smoke, flames, or extinguishing agent are very reactive and have the ability to an Oxygen label. For oxidizers currently will enter any compartment occupied by initiate and substantially intensify fires. authorized for transportation aboard the crew or passengers when the These materials currently are forbidden both passenger-carrying aircraft and compartment is being accessed; and (3) for transportation by passenger-carrying cargo aircraft, the effect of this action in which an approved smoke detector or aircraft. Some are also forbidden for would be that packages now would be fire detector system is installed. Under transportation by cargo aircraft, and labeled (see § 172.101(j)(4)) with the the provisions of 49 CFR 175.85 (a) and others are permitted only in restricted Cargo Aircraft Only label specified in (b), hazardous materials transported in a quantities aboard cargo-only aircraft § 172.448 and would be subject to the Class B compartment must be when loaded in a manner which renders provisions of § 175.85(b). Paragraph (b) inaccessible to passengers but accessible them accessible to a crew member of § 175.85 restricts hazardous materials to crew members. during flight. Liquid or solid oxidizers that are forbidden aboard passenger- In the event of a fire in a Class B cargo that will initiate a fire are not permitted carrying aircraft, but authorized aboard compartment, protective breathing on passenger-carrying aircraft. However, cargo aircraft, to locations where ‘‘a equipment should protect crew gaseous oxygen is permitted on crew member or other authorized members from smoke and fumes. passenger-carrying aircraft; combustible person can see, handle, and where size However, supplemental oxygen materials can be readily ignited, by and weight permit, separate such breathing systems for passengers are impact, high temperature, or flame, if packages from other cargo during designed to provide a combination of exposed to gaseous oxygen. flight.’’ This means that oxidizers also supplemental oxygen and ambient cabin 44376 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 20, 1997 / Proposed Rules air for use in emergency decompression injury or death. It also increases the risk Aircraft Operators’ and Passengers’ situations. These breathing systems are that control of the aircraft will be lost. Own Oxygen Cylinders not designed to protect passengers from This may be caused by damage to the In this supplemental NPRM, RSPA is smoke and fumes, and passengers aircraft’s flight control cables, hydraulic proposing provisions by which an would continue to inhale some amount systems, electrical systems or structure, aircraft operator may transport limited of ambient air in the cabin. According or entry of fire and smoke into the numbers of the operator’s own cylinders to FAA, a fire fed by a secondary source aircraft’s cabin. For the reasons set forth (e.g., replacements for cylinders of oxygen would create additional above, RSPA is proposing to prohibit required aboard an aircraft or cylinders smoke and fume risks to passengers that the transportation of oxidizers aboard being returned for maintenance) would not otherwise be present in fires passenger-carrying aircraft and in containing compressed oxygen aboard that are not fed by a secondary source inaccessible locations aboard cargo passenger-carrying aircraft and by of oxygen. Dangerous or even fatal which an air carrier may transport a levels of smoke and fumes are more aircraft. cylinder belonging to a passenger likely to develop and migrate to the V. Exceptions for Carriage of Oxygen on needing oxygen at destination for passenger cabin when a fire is fed by a Passenger-carrying Aircraft personal medical use. secondary source of oxygen. As indicated in the December 30, According to the FAA, even if a halon RSPA is proposing to add a special 1996 NPRM, FAA supports a complete fire-suppressant system is present, provision in § 172.102 and to the removal of oxidizers from passenger- although effective against most fires, it Hazardous Materials Table entry for carrying aircraft but also believes that, if may not be effective against an oxidizer- ‘‘Oxygen, compressed,’’ to clarify that it is necessary to allow a passenger to fed fire. If a water fire extinguisher is certain exceptions are provided in transport his or her own oxygen used, it may not have a sufficient § 175.10 for carriage of oxygen on cylinder for use at destination, it is far quantity of water to extinguish a fire passenger-carrying aircraft. These that continues to reignite because it is safer to stow the cylinder in the exceptions, some of which are in the passenger cabin, under the control of being fed by an oxygen source. HMR at present and some of which are Although all areas of a Class B and accessible to the airline crew, than proposed in this notice, are discussed in compartment must be accessible to the in an inaccessible cargo compartment. the following paragraphs. contents of a hand-held fire FAA does not believe that oxygen should be carried in inaccessible cargo extinguisher, oxidizers stowed in a Oxygen for Use of Passengers During compartments. FAA believes that, if an compartment where other materials are Flight burning may be difficult or impossible oxygen cylinder is involved in a fire, the to remove or otherwise keep away from The proposed prohibition against release of oxygen will intensify the fire the fire. transportation of oxidizers as cargo and a fire that might otherwise be would not affect the existing exception survivable has an increased risk of Class C Compartments in 49 CFR 175.10(a)(7) for operator- becoming fatal. Thus, FAA believes that A Class C compartment is not supplied oxygen for a passenger’s use it would be safer to carry personal medical oxygen cylinders in the cabin accessible during flight but has: (1) An during flight or the exception in 49 CFR because the crew could quickly remove approved smoke detector or fire detector 175.10(a)(14) for a transport incubator the cylinders from any fire area in the system; (2) an approved built-in fire- unit necessary to protect life, or an extinguishing system; (3) means to cabin. This is in contrast to the organ preservation unit necessary to control ventilation and drafts so that the complete inability of the crew to remove protect human organs. extinguishing agent can control a fire compressed oxygen from an inaccessible that may start within the compartment; As proposed in the December 30, cargo compartment. and (4) means to exclude hazardous 1996 NPRM, RSPA is proposing an RSPA believes that oxygen can be quantities of smoke, flames or editorial change to § 175.10(a)(7) to safely transported aboard passenger- extinguishing agent from any clarify that this exception applies only carrying aircraft and that there is a compartment occupied by crew or to oxygen furnished by an aircraft continuing need, for reasons of safety, passengers. operator for medical use of an onboard service to passengers and potential cost While Class C cargo compartments passenger and does not allow the impacts of a total prohibition, to permit have safety features that can control aircraft operator to transport medical an airline to transport its own oxygen most types of fires, RSPA and FAA oxygen cylinders as cargo in order to cylinders and to transport a cylinder believe that an oxygen-fed fire can move them to the locations where they belonging to a passenger needing overcome these safety features and pose will be needed, at a later time, for use oxygen at destination for personal an unacceptable risk in the aviation by passengers. This proposal is included medical use. RSPA’s proposal provides environment. Moreover, an oxygen-fed in the regulatory text of this airlines a means of using their own fire in a Class C compartment may supplemental NPRM for convenience of passenger-carrying aircraft to position oxygen cylinders needed by passengers present a greater risk than a fire in a the reader. Class B compartment. Unlike a Class B on subsequent flights or to place oxygen compartment that a crew member can Personal Use Chemical Oxygen cylinders used on aircraft, such as those physically enter, a Class C compartment Generators in Checked Baggage used for the flight crew’s personal is not physically accessible to crew breathing equipment or emergency-use members. Thus, for a Class C As proposed in the December 30, medical oxygen. Although oxygen compartment, there is no possibility for 1996 NPRM, RSPA is proposing in this cylinders required on aircraft by FAA a crew member to remove an oxidizer supplemental NPRM to remove the regulations are not subject to the HMR, from the area of the fire or to attack the exception provided in § 175.10(a)(24) replacements carried aboard aircraft are. fire with a hand-held extinguisher. for small personal chemical oxygen This proposed exception will provide A fire that is fed by a secondary generators in checked baggage. See the an alternative to cargo aircraft or surface source of oxygen increases the risk that December 30, 1996 NPRM for additional transportation for prepositioning flames, toxic smoke or fumes may cause discussion of this proposal. essential supplies of oxygen. Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 20, 1997 / Proposed Rules 44377

At present, a passenger who needs UN1072), and with the statement flight. Air carriers are permitted to supplemental oxygen may ship it in ‘‘Passenger cabin acceptable per 49 CFR provide oxygen for passenger use in conformance with the HMR when it is 175.10’’ to explain the apparent accordance with specified requirements offered and accepted as air cargo by an discrepancy concerning appearance of a in the aforementioned rules, although airline that is capable and willing to Cargo Aircraft Only label on an some air carriers may not provide this transport hazardous materials and has overpack in the cabin of a passenger- service for their passengers. RSPA seeks procedures for handling hazardous carrying aircraft. comment on whether the new proposed materials which have been approved by Prior to placing a cylinder in an provisions placed on carriage of air the FAA under existing rules (e.g., 14 overpack, the aircraft operator would be carriers’ own oxygen cylinders will CFR 121.25, 121.135, 135.21, and required to check that the cylinder’s significantly interfere with carriers’ 135.23). It may be carried as cargo (i.e., valves are closed and the cylinder is free ability to provide this service to as freight rather than as checked of flammable contaminants. The aircraft passengers. Also, compressed oxygen, baggage) on the same aircraft carrying operator would then stow the overpack while regulated as a hazardous material, the passenger. The advantage is that the in the passenger cabin in accordance is different in form from other oxidizers passenger would have that oxygen with procedures approved by the FAA which are usually liquids and solids. available for use at destination without and notify the pilot-in-command as to RSPA requests comments as to whether having to arrange with an oxygen the presence and location of the there is any evidence (e.g., accident or supplier, if one services the destination cylinder. Air carriers currently are incident information, studies, etc.) to airport, to charge the passenger’s required to have FAA-approved suggest that gaseous oxygen in cylinder or provide a supplier-owned procedures in operations manuals, plans cylinders, as distinct from chemical charged cylinder upon arrival. or specifications if they carry hazardous oxidizers, poses or has created Under this proposed rule, carriage of materials. significant safety problems while being oxygen in cargo compartments on RSPA currently permits the carriage transported in cargo compartments. passenger-carrying aircraft would no of oxygen cylinders in passenger FAA, RSPA, and the Office of the longer be permitted. However, the compartments by several aircraft Secretary are initiating a project exception proposed in § 175.10(b) operators under the provisions of an separate from this rulemaking action to would permit an airline to carry a exemption, DOT–E 10114. The purpose explore whether safe alternatives exist passenger’s oxygen cylinder on the same of the exemption is to facilitate the for accommodating passenger needs in aircraft as the passenger in the same predeployment, and return for regard to use of oxygen. This project manner as the airline carries its own maintenance, of cylinders owned and could result in proposals to amend the cylinders. The oxygen cylinder would maintained by an aircraft operator for relevant portions of the HMR and FAA not be available to the passenger during use by passengers needing oxygen regulations as well as those of the Office flight; only oxygen furnished by the during flight. The provisions of the of the Secretary implementing the Air aircraft operator under the provisions of exemption serve as a basis for this Carrier Access Act of 1986 (49 U.S.C. 49 CFR 175.10(a)(7) would be available rulemaking proposal and, although not 41705), which prohibits discrimination for use during flight. authorized under the exemption, have in regard to air traveler access on the Based on FAA’s assessment of the been expanded to cover carriage by an basis of disability. potential hazards of compressed oxygen aircraft operator of a passenger’s own in a cargo compartment, RSPA is cylinder. RSPA anticipates that the VII. Spent Oxygen Generators proposing much more restrictive exemption would no longer be RSPA is proposing to prohibit the provisions for its carriage on passenger- necessary if this proposal becomes a transportation by aircraft of spent carrying aircraft than currently apply, final rule. chemical oxygen generators (i.e., particularly that the oxygen be carried generators in which the means of VI. Effects on Individuals With only in the cabin of the aircraft. The initiation and the chemical core have Disabilities aircraft operator would be limited to no been expended) and to regulate them as more than six of its own cylinders and RSPA and FAA believe that Class 9 materials when transported by no more than one cylinder belonging to exceptions for shipment and use of other than aircraft. This proposal was each passenger needing the oxygen at oxygen proposed in 49 CFR 175.10(b) not in the December 30, 1996 NPRM. destination, and would have to eliminate any negative effects this Spent chemical oxygen generators overpack each cylinder in a fire- rulemaking may have on passengers currently may be regulated as hazardous resistant metal or plastic case. A who need supplemental breathing wastes because of the residual materials passenger’s cylinder would be limited oxygen when they disembark from contained therein. They may also pose in rated capacity to 850 liters (30 cubic aircraft at their destination and on the a hazard in transportation by containing feet) or less of oxygen. ability of airlines to preposition or stage unburned oxidizing materials. In addition to being labeled for the oxygen at various locations for use by Regardless of the degree of hazard oxygen hazard (i.e., with either Oxygen passengers. RSPA is interested in posed by the chemical contents, it can or Non-Flammable Gas and Oxidizer receiving comments from oxygen users, be difficult to confirm that a generator labels, as specified in subpart D of Part air carriers, and suppliers of oxygen truly is spent. Human error in assessing 172), each cylinder and overpack would about these effects and whether the whether such devices are, in fact, empty be required to be labeled with a Cargo proposed provisions for carriage of can result in a catastrophe. RSPA and Aircraft Only label to ensure that the oxygen in passenger cabins are a safe FAA believe that lessening the overpack does not get placed in any and feasible alternative to a total possibility that this type of human error cargo compartment on a passenger- prohibition. may occur outweighs any interest or carrying aircraft or in an inaccessible Under separate RSPA and FAA rules need for transporting spent chemical compartment or location when (49 CFR 175.10(a)(7), and 14 CFR oxygen generators by aircraft. transported on cargo aircraft. The 121.574 and 135.91, respectively), Based on the foregoing, RSPA is overpack would be marked with the which this proposal would not amend, proposing to add to the Hazardous proper shipping name and identification passengers may not carry their own Materials Table (HMT) an entry for number (i.e., Oxygen, Compressed, oxygen aboard aircraft for use during spent chemical oxygen generators. A 44378 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 20, 1997 / Proposed Rules new shipping description, ‘‘Oxygen nonetheless, be potential logistical the Poisson probability distribution. generator, chemical, spent, 9, NA3356, impacts. Occasionally, hazardous This tool provides a means to III’’ would be added. The entry would materials are tendered for shipment that statistically estimate the probability of be preceded by a plus (‘‘+’’) in Column are not compatible and must be the occurrence of rare and random 1 to fix the proper shipping name, separated during transport. Currently, events based on an observed rate of hazard class and packing group for the these materials may be transported in occurrence. In the case of cargo entry without regard to whether the separate compartments. Therefore, the compartment fires in the presence of material meets the definition of Class 9 proposed rule may have an impact upon oxidizers, the observed mean is two or Packing Group III. Special provision cargo airlines because of the airline’s over 10 years. The Poisson probability 61 would be added in Column 7 to inability to transport incompatible distribution with a mean of two suggests specify the conditions under which an hazardous materials on the same flight. there is a small chance (14 percent) that oxygen generator is considered ‘‘spent.’’ As a result, one of the hazardous there would be no oxidizer fires in the For transportation aboard passenger- materials tendered to the airline for next decade based on the past accident carrying and cargo aircraft, Columns 9a transport may experience a delay. RSPA history. However, there is an 86 percent and 9b would read ‘‘Forbidden.’’ RSPA solicits information from cargo-only probability of one or more such fires. In also proposes to amend §§ 171.11, aircraft operators that may incur this, or addition, there is a 14 percent 171.12 and 171.12a, consistent with its other, costs due to implementation of probability that there would be four or proposal in the December 30, 1996 the proposed rule. more fires with oxidizers present. NPRM, to indicate that there are no RSPA and FAA expect that the total Any one of these probable events exceptions from HMR requirements for compliance cost to the aviation industry could be more serious than the two classification, description, and attributed to this proposed rule would reported incidents. According to the packaging of spent chemical oxygen be borne by operators of passenger- FAA, fire aboard an aircraft is one of the generators when shipping to, from or carrying aircraft. greatest threats to safety that can happen within the U.S. under the provisions of This supplemental NPRM expands, in air transportation. For example, an international or Canadian regulations. also, the prohibition of carriage of Air Canada flight from Dallas in 1983 chemical oxygen generators aboard made an emergency landing at the VIII. Cost/Benefit Analysis passenger-carrying aircraft by proposing Greater Cincinnati International Airport Analysis of Costs to prohibit the shipment of spent because of a fire of undetermined origin. chemical oxygen generators on aircraft. As soon as the airplane stopped, it was The preliminary regulatory evaluation Because a spent chemical oxygen evacuated. However, 23 passengers were ‘‘Prohibition of Oxidizers and Oxidizing generator has no residual or economic unable to exit the aircraft before the Materials as Cargo in Aircraft’’ (June value, and there is no urgent need to interior was engulfed in a flash fire. In 1997) developed in support of this ship it by aircraft, RSPA and FAA 1983 a British Airtours flight was supplemental NPRM revises the earlier determined there is essentially no aborted during takeoff and 55 of the 137 estimate of 10-year costs associated with adverse cost impact associated with the persons onboard were unable to the December 30, 1996 proposal to proposed prohibition. evacuate before a fire engulfed and prohibit oxidizers in Class D cargo RSPA has received comments on the destroyed the aircraft. compartments from $25 million ($17 potential costs of the NPRM. These With respect to spent chemical million, discounted) to $18 million ($12 comments and cost-related comments to oxygen generators, the Poisson million, discounted). This supplemental this supplemental NPRM will be taken probability distribution with a mean of NPRM would impose additional costs into account in developing a final four suggests, in the absence of any on air carriers by prohibiting oxidizers regulatory evaluation prior to issuance regulatory action, that there is only a 2 in Class B and C cargo compartments on of a final rule. percent probability of no chemical passenger aircraft and all inaccessible oxygen generator fire in the next decade, Analysis of Benefits compartments in cargo-only aircraft. based on actual incident and accident The additional cost of compliance (in Notwithstanding current regulatory history. But, there is a 98 percent the form of lost revenue) to air carriers restrictions, hazardous materials, probability there will be one or more imposed by this proposal is estimated to including oxidizers, are occasionally such fires in the same time period. In be $17 million ($12 million, improperly carried in airplane cargo the absence of a regulatory prohibition discounted), in 1996 dollars, over the compartments through inadvertent or on their carriage, there is a 57 percent next 10 years. deliberate package mislabeling. Over the probability of four or more incidents RSPA and FAA are aware that the past 10 years, there are only two and accidents in the next 10 years, as estimated cost associated with the documented incidents where oxidizers there were in the last 10 years, involving proposed prohibition on oxidizers does (of types other than chemical oxygen chemical oxygen generators. not include any reduction in variable generators) were known to be present in To determine the potential benefits operating costs, such as fuel savings, the cargo compartment of a U.S. air that would result from this proposed that may result due to less weight being carrier when a fire occurred. Those rule, RSPA and FAA estimated the carried aboard the aircraft. In addition, incidents resulted only in minor injuries average costs associated with potential this cost estimate may not represent a and damage, though damage from one of future fire accidents involving ‘‘spent’’ net loss to the aviation industry, as the fires extended outside the cargo chemical oxygen generators. In the May RSPA and FAA expect much of the compartment. RSPA and FAA believe, 11, 1996 incident, there were 110 affected traffic would shift to cargo-only however, that the risk of fire as casualties and a McDonnell Douglas operators. Overall cost to the aviation evidenced by the number of actual fires DC–9–32 was destroyed. The monetary industry may, therefore, be less than the that have occurred justifies this value of this loss was ascertained in 10-year costs estimated for this proposed prohibition on the carriage of several steps. First, a critical economic proposed rule. oxidizers in inaccessible cargo value of $2.7 million was applied to RSPA and FAA have not identified compartments. each human casualty. This computation any cost impacts to cargo aircraft One analytical tool commonly used in resulted in an estimate of $297 million carriers, but recognize there could, the statistical analysis of rare events is ($2.7 million x 110). Next the value of Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 20, 1997 / Proposed Rules 44379 the destroyed aircraft was estimated to potential safety benefits for prohibiting remote areas, such as Alaska, where be $6 million. If this rulemaking the shipment of oxidizers, the high level frequent cargo-only air service may not prevents one such catastrophic incident of risk created by the presence of those be available, and suggestions for over the next 10 years, the expected hazardous materials aboard aircraft limiting this hardship. value of potential safety benefits would warrants adoption of the prohibitions. By limiting the prohibition on be $303 million ($213 million, Preventing one catastrophic incident oxidizers to packages required to be discounted). like the May 11, 1996 ValuJet accident, labeled Oxidizer and Oxygen, the This supplemental NPRM reduces the would result in calculated safety prohibition would not apply to chance that a cargo compartment fire benefits of $303 million ($213 million, oxidizers renamed ‘‘consumer will be enhanced by an oxidizer, discounted over ten years). commodity’’ and reclassed as ORM–D thereby increasing the likelihood that a IX. Request for Additional Comments under the provisions of § 173.152, or as cargo compartment fire would be consumer commodities, Class 9, as successfully contained or extinguished. RSPA requests that interested parties permitted under § 171.11. RSPA One measure of calculating whether the provide additional information requests comments regarding whether it proposed prohibition on oxidizers is concerning the costs and benefits of this would be appropriate to extend this cost-beneficial is to determine if it proposed action. RSPA also requests prohibition to consumer commodities would prevent incidents that otherwise information concerning the hazards which are oxidizers or whether more would claim at least thirteen lives over posed by oxidizers in aircraft cargo restrictive packaging, per package the next 10 years. RSPA and FAA are compartments that have fire detection or quantity limits, or aircraft quantity confident this proposed prohibition has suppression systems. RSPA requests limits should be imposed on these the potential to achieve that level of that shippers and carriers, including materials. benefits. foreign carriers, provide detailed cost information to RSPA as to the type and X. Study To Assess the Risks Relation to FAA Rulemaking on Cargo amounts of any costs that may result Associated With Transportation of Compartments from the proposed prohibition of Hazardous Materials in Aircraft Cargo The FAA has proposed to upgrade fire oxidizers on passenger-carrying aircraft. Compartments safety standard for cargo or baggage In evaluating the costs and benefits of RSPA, in coordination with FAA, has compartments by eliminating Class D the proposed rule, RSPA and FAA have initiated a study to assess the risks compartments and requiring their assumed that cargo aircraft operators associated with the transportation of conversion to the equivalent of Class C would not incur any costs because of hazardous materials in aircraft cargo or Class E compartments. The NPRM is their ability to transport oxidizers in compartments. As beginning steps, entitled ‘‘Revised Standards for Cargo or accessible cargo compartments of an RSPA assembled a panel of experts and Baggage Compartments in Transport aircraft. In addition, RSPA and FAA held meetings in Cambridge, Category Airplanes,’’ 62 FR 32412 (June have assumed that there would be little Massachusetts on October 22 and 23, 13, 1997). While the benefits of these or no impact on shippers of oxidizers 1996, and in Washington, D.C. on June two proposed rules would overlap because of the availability of other 10 through 12, 1997, for purposes of somewhat, each of them will also means of transportation (e.g., cargo identifying accident scenarios, provide benefits that the other would aircraft or highway transportation). probabilities of occurrence, and RSPA and FAA have not assessed the not. The FAA’s proposed rule addresses expected consequences. In attendance at costs associated with prohibiting the the risks of any fire in an inaccessible the meetings were representatives from shipment of oxygen cylinders on cargo compartment that lacks fire or the NTSB, FAA, Air Transport passenger-carrying aircraft. Although smoke detection and suppression Association of America, Chemical the proposed exceptions in § 175.10(b) (including a situation when no oxidizer Manufacturers Association, Air Line serve to mitigate any adverse impacts, is present). This proposed rule Pilots Association, International Air there may be some costs to air carriers addresses the risks of transporting an Line Passenger Association and several if they routinely use passenger-carrying oxidizer on board a passenger-carrying aircraft manufacturers. Based on the aircraft to transport, as cargo, oxygen aircraft (even when carried in a outcome of this study, RSPA may cylinders which are normally installed compartment with fire or smoke initiate rulemaking to prohibit or further or required on aircraft and must be detection and suppression equipment). limit the transportation of other types of periodically retested or refilled, or FAA has determined that both hazardous materials on aircraft. initiatives would yield benefits that which are prepositioned for use by justify their costs, 62 FR 32420, but passengers on subsequent flights. XI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices Therefore, RSPA requests information interested parties are invited to submit Executive Order 12866 and DOT concerning the costs and benefits of comments on the potential for overlap Regulatory Policies and Procedures in the benefits of these two proposed prohibiting cylinders containing rules. oxygen, aboard passenger-carrying This proposed rule is considered a aircraft. Please provide detailed significant regulatory action under Comparison of Costs and Benefits information as to the manner by which section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 The proposed restrictions contained costs may be incurred. In particular, and was reviewed by the Office of in the NPRM and this supplemental RSPA requests information on (1) the Management and Budget. The rule is NPRM would impose an estimated 10- number of cylinders of oxygen which considered significant under the year cost of $35 million ($24 million, are transported each day on passenger- regulatory policies and procedures of discounted) by prohibiting the shipment carrying aircraft; (2) the typical size of the Department of Transportation (44 FR of oxidizers on passenger-carrying these cylinders; (3) other means of 11034). A preliminary regulatory aircraft, and no identified costs by transportation that are available; and (4) evaluation is available for review in the prohibiting the shipment of spent the cost differences to the airlines for public docket. A summary of the costs oxygen generators on passenger-carrying using other means of transportation. and benefits of this supplemental NPRM aircraft. While RSPA and FAA have RSPA requests comments concerning is set forth in Section VIII of this been unable to estimate quantitative any hardships that may be caused in preamble. 44380 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 20, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Executive Order 12612 operating under 14 CFR part 121, RSPA significant economic impact threshold This proposed rule has been analyzed and FAA adopted the Federal Aviation of $4,900. While one-third of the above in accordance with the principles and Administration (FAA) Order 2100.14A aircraft operators would incur criteria contained in Executive Order (Regulatory Flexibility Criteria and significant economic costs, a substantial 12612 (‘‘Federalism’’). The Federal Guidance) as the standard by which the number of them would not be impacted hazardous materials transportation law potential impact on small entities would because their number is less than (49 U.S.C. 5101–5127) contains an be determined. The potential impact on eleven. small entities is the cost (revenue losses) express preemption provision that Small Entities, Scheduled preempts State, local, and Indian tribe incurred by carriers that currently transport oxidizers and spent chemical requirements on certain covered RSPA and FAA also determined that oxygen generators. There is very little subjects. Covered subjects are: there are two part 121 scheduled aircraft (A) The designation, description, and data to determine the proposed rule’s operators that meet the definition of a classification of hazardous material; economic impact on entities other than small entity. The ten-year estimated cost (B) The packing, repacking, handling, those operating under 14 CFR part 121 of compliance for the scheduled entity labeling, marking, and placarding of (e.g., part 135 operators). Therefore, with less than 60 passenger seats would hazardous material; RSPA requests comments on the be $60,000 ($42,200, discounted). (C) The preparation, execution, and economic impact, if any, of this Similarly, for the entity with more than use of shipping documents pertaining to proposed rule on other entities. 60 passenger seats, the ten-year cost of According to FAA Order 2100.14A, a hazardous material and requirements compliance would be $9,800 ($6,900, substantial number of small entities is respecting the number, content, and discounted). Over a ten-year period, the defined as a number which is not less placement of such documents; annualized potential cost of compliance than eleven and which is more than (D) The written notification, for the entity with less than 60 one-third of the small entities subject to recording, and reporting of the passenger seats and the entity with more a proposed or existing rule. A unintentional release in transportation than 60 passenger seats would be $6,000 significant economic impact refers to of hazardous material; or and $1,000, respectively. These the annualized threshold assigned to (E) The design, manufacturing, annualized cost of compliance estimates each entity group potentially impacted fabrication, marking, maintenance, are far less than their respective by rulemaking actions. For this reconditioning, repairing, or testing of a significant economic thresholds of proposed rule, the small entities are $70,100 and $125,500. package or container which is eight 14 CFR part operators (scheduled represented, marked, certified, or sold Based upon the above, I certify that and non-scheduled) that carry this proposed rule would not have a as qualified for use in the transportation hazardous materials. The annualized of hazardous material. significant economic impact on a significant economic impact threshold substantial number of small entities. Because RSPA lacks discretion in this for non-scheduled aircraft operators is area, preparation of a federalism While the proposed rule would have a estimated to be $4,900. Similarly, the significant economic impact on two of assessment is not warranted. annualized significant economic impact Title 49 U.S.C. 5125(b)(2) provides the eight small entities examined in this threshold for scheduled aircraft analysis, it would not impact a that DOT must determine and publish operators is estimated to be $70,100 in the Federal Register the effective date substantial number of those small (operators with less than 60 passenger entities. of Federal preemption. That effective seats) and $125,500 (operators with date may not be earlier than the 90th more than 60 passenger seats). Paperwork Reduction Act day following the date of issuance of the A small entity is defined in the FAA This supplemental notice of proposed final rule and not later than two years Order 2100.14A as an operator of after the date of issuance. This proposed rulemaking does not impose any new aircraft for hire with nine or fewer information collection requirements. rule would require oxidizers to be aircraft owned but not necessarily transported in certain types of cargo operated. RSPA and FAA identified a Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) compartments aboard aircraft. RSPA total of eight operators that meet this A regulation identifier number (RIN) solicits comments on whether the definition. Those operators comprise is assigned to each regulatory action proposed rule would have any effect on two groups: (1) Non-scheduled small listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal State, local or Indian tribe requirements part 121 operators and (2) scheduled Regulations. The Regulatory Information and, if so, the most appropriate effective small part 121 operators. Service Center publishes the Unified date of Federal preemption. To determine the impact of the Agenda in April and October of each Regulatory Flexibility Act proposed rule on these small entities, year. The RIN number contained in the RSPA and FAA estimated the heading of this document can be used The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 annualized cost impact on each of those (RFA) was enacted by Congress to to cross-reference this action with the small entities within the two groups. Unified Agenda. ensure that small entities (small The annualized cost impact per small business and small not-for-profit entity is based on the annual number of List of Subjects organizations which are independently ton miles for oxidizer shipments times 49 CFR Part 171 owned and operated, and small the respective revenue-per-ton-mile government jurisdictions) are not estimate. Exports, Hazardous materials unnecessarily and disproportionately transportation, Hazardous waste, burdened by Federal regulations. The Small Entities, Non-scheduled Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping RFA requires regulatory agencies to RSPA and FAA determined there are requirements. review rules which may have ‘‘a six non-scheduled part 121 aircraft significant economic impact on a operators that meet the definition of a 49 CFR Part 172 substantial number of small entities.’’ small entity. Of the six small entities Education, Hazardous materials Since this proposed rule would within this group, only two would have transportation, Hazardous waste, primarily impact those entities annualized costs that exceed the Labeling, Marking, Packaging and Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 20, 1997 / Proposed Rules 44381 containers, Reporting and recordkeeping oxygen generator, chemical, spent, must § 171.12a Canadian shipments and requirements. be classed, described and packaged in packagings. accordance with the requirements of * * * * * 49 CFR Part 175 this subchapter. (b) * * * Air carriers, Hazardous materials (16) A package containing a (17) An oxygen generator (chemical) transportation, Radioactive materials, hazardous material for which an must be classed, approved, and Reporting and recordkeeping Oxidizer or Oxygen label is required described in accordance with the requirements. under part 172, subpart E, of this requirements of this subchapter and an In consideration of the foregoing, 49 subchapter, may not be offered for oxygen generator, chemical, spent, must CFR parts 171, 172, and 175 are transportation or transported in a be classed, described and packaged in proposed to be amended as follows: passenger-carrying aircraft except as accordance with the requirements of specified in this subchapter. this subchapter. PART 171ÐGENERAL INFORMATION, REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS 3. In § 171.12, paragraph (b)(18) is PART 172ÐHAZARDOUS MATERIALS revised to read as follows: TABLE, SPECIAL PROVISIONS, 1. The authority citation for part 171 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS § 171.12 Import and export shipments. continues to read as follows: COMMUNICATIONS, EMERGENCY Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5127; 49 CFR * * * * * RESPONSE INFORMATION, AND 1.53. (b) * * * TRAINING REQUIREMENTS 2. In § 171.11, paragraph (d)(15) is (18) An oxygen generator (chemical) 5. The authority citation for part 172 revised and paragraph (d)(16) is added must be classed, approved, and continues to read as follows: to read as follows: described in accordance with the Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5127; 49 CFR requirements of this subchapter and an § 171.11 Use of ICAO Technical 1.53. Instructions. oxygen generator, chemical, spent, must be classed, described and packaged in 6. In the § 172.101 Hazardous * * * * * accordance with the requirements of Materials Table, the following entry is (d) * * * this subchapter. added in appropriate alphabetical order: (15) An oxygen generator (chemical) must be classed, approved, and * * * * * § 172.101 Purpose and use of hazardous described in accordance with the 4. In § 171.12a, paragraph (b)(17) is materials table. requirements of this subchapter and an revised to read as follows: * * * * * 44382 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 20, 1997 / Proposed Rules (10B) Other (10) A tion requirements (10A) Loca- Vessel stowage (9B) craft only Cargo air- Forbidden (9) (9A) Quantity limitations Forbidden aircraft/rail Passenger Bulk (8C) None 213 bulk (8B) Non- (8) 173.***) (§ ABLE (8A) tions None T Excep- Packaging authorizations 61 (7) sions provi- Special ATERIALS M 9 (6) Label codes AZARDOUS III (5) PG (4) bers num- Identi- fication NA3356 172.101.ÐH 9 (3) sion class or divi- Hazard ECTION S (2) names ******* ******* Oxygen generator, chemical, spent Hazardous materials descriptions and proper shipping + (1) bols Sym- Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 20, 1997 / Proposed Rules 44383

§ 172.101 [Amended] Ferric nitrate Sodium chlorite 7. In addition, in the § 172.101 Guanidine nitrate Sodium nitrate Hazardous Materials Table, Column Hydrogen peroxide and peroxyacetic acid Sodium nitrate and potassium nitrate (9A) is amended by removing the mixtures, stabilized with acids, water and mixtures not more than 5 percent peroxyacetic acid Sodium nitrite existing language and adding the word Hydrogen peroxide, aqueous solutions with Sodium perchlorate ‘‘Forbidden’’ for the following entries: not less than 8 percent but less than 20 Sodium permanganate Aluminum nitrate percent hydrogen peroxide (stabilized as Sodium peroxoborate, anhydrous Ammonium dichromate necessary) Sodium persulfate Ammonium nitrate fertilizers Hydrogen peroxide, aqueous solutions with Strontium chlorate Ammonium nitrate fertilizers; uniform non- not less than 20 percent but not more than Strontium nitrate segregating mixtures of ammonium nitrate 40 percent hydrogen peroxide (stabilized Strontium perchlorate with added matter which is inorganic and as necessary) Strontium peroxide chemically inert towards ammonium Hypochlorites, inorganic, n.o.s. Thallium chlorate nitrate, with not less than 90 percent Lead dioxide Thallium nitrate ammonium nitrate and not more than 0.2 Lead nitrate Toxic liquids, oxidizing, n.o.s. (PG II) percent combustible material (including Lead perchlorate, solid Toxic solids, oxidizing, n.o.s. (PG I and II) organic material calculated as carbon), or Lead perchlorate, solution mono- (Trichloro) tetra-(monopotassium with more than 70 percent but less than 90 Liquefied gas, oxidizing, n.o.s. dichloro)-penta-s-triazinetrione, dry (with percent ammonium nitrate and not more Lithium hypochlorite, dry or Lithium more than 39 percent available chlorine) than 0.4 percent total combustible material hypochlorite mixtures, dry Trichloroisocyanuric acid, dry Ammonium nitrate mixed fertilizers Lithium nitrate Urea hydrogen peroxide Ammonium nitrate, with not more than 0.2 Lithium peroxide Zinc ammonium nitrite percent of combustible substances, Magnesium bromate Zinc bromate including any organic substance calculated Magnesium chlorate Zinc chlorate as carbon, to the exclusion of any other Magnesium nitrate Zinc nitrate added substance Magnesium perchlorate Zinc permanganate Ammonium perchlorate (PG II) Magnesium peroxide Zinc peroxide Ammonium persulfate Manganese nitrate Zirconium nitrate Barium bromate Medicines, oxidizing substance, solid n.o.s. Barium chlorate Nickel nitrate § 172.101 [Amended] Barium hypochlorite with more than 22 Nickel nitrite 8. In addition, in the § 172.101 Nitrates, inorganic, aqueous solution, n.o.s. percent available chlorine Hazardous Materials Table, for the entry Barium nitrate (PG II and III) Barium perchlorate Nitrates, inorganic, n.o.s. (PG II and III) ‘‘Oxygen, compressed’’, in Column (7), Barium permanganate Nitrites, inorganic, aqueous solution, n.o.s. special provision ‘‘A52’’ is added. Barium peroxide (PG II and III) 9. In § 172.102, special provision ‘‘61’’ Beryllium nitrate Nitrites, inorganic, n.o.s. is added in appropriate numerical Bromate, inorganic, aqueous solution, n.o.s. Nitrous oxide, compressed sequence to paragraph (c)(1) and special Bromate, inorganic, n.o.s. Oxidizing liquid, corrosive, n.o.s. (PG II and provision ‘‘A52’’ is added in appropriate Calcium chlorate III) alphanumerical sequence to paragraph Calcium chlorate aqueous solution Oxidizing liquid, n.o.s. (PG I, II and III) Calcium chlorite Oxidizing liquid, toxic, n.o.s. (PG II and III) (c)(2), to read as follows: Calcium hypochlorite, dry or Calcium Oxidizing solid, corrosive, n.o.s. (PG I, II and § 172.102 Special provisions. hypochlorite mixtures dry with more than III) 39 percent available chlorine (8.8 percent Oxidizing solid, n.o.s. (PG I, II, and III) * * * * * available oxygen) Oxidizing solid, toxic, n.o.s. (PG I, II, and III) (c) * * * Calcium hypochlorite, hydrated or Calcium Oxygen, compressed (1) * * * hypochlorite, hydrated mixtures, with not Perchlorates, inorganic, aqueous solution, less than 5.5 percent but not more than 10 n.o.s. (PG II and III) Code/Special Provisions percent water Perchlorates, inorganic, n.o.s. (PG II and III) * * * * * Calcium hypochlorite mixtures, dry, with Permanganates, inorganic, aqueous solution, 61 A chemical oxygen generator is spent more than 10 percent but not more than 39 n.o.s. if its means of ignition and its chemical core percent available chlorine Permanganates, inorganic, n.o.s. (PG II and have been expended. Calcium nitrate III) * * * * * Calcium perchlorate Peroxides, inorganic, n.o.s. (PG II and III) Calcium permanganate Persulfates, inorganic, aqueous solution, (2) * * * Calcium peroxide n.o.s. Code/Special Provisions Cesium nitrate or Caesium nitrate Persulfates, inorganic, n.o.s. * * * * * Chlorate and borate mixtures (PG II and III) Potassium bromate A52 Oxygen, compressed, may be offered Chlorate and magnesium chloride mixtures Potassium chlorate for transportation and transported on a (PG II and III) Potassium chlorate, aqueous solution (PG II passenger-carrying aircraft in accordance Chlorates, inorganic, aqueous solution, n.o.s. and III) with the provisions of § 175.10(a)(7), (a)(14), Chlorates, inorganic, n.o.s. Potassium nitrate or (b) of this subchapter. Chlorites, inorganic, n.o.s. Potassium nitrate and sodium nitrite Chromic acid, solid mixtures * * * * * Chromium nitrate Potassium nitrite Chromium trioxide, anhydrous Potassium perchlorate, solid PART 175ÐCARRIAGE BY AIRCRAFT Compressed gas, oxidizing, n.o.s. Potassium perchlorate, solution Copper chlorate Potassium permanganate 9a. The authority citation for part 175 Corrosive liquids, oxidizing, n.o.s. (PG II) Potassium persulfate continues to read as follows: Corrosive solids, oxidizing, n.o.s. (PG I and Silver nitrate Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5127; 49 CFR II) Sodium bromate 1.53. Dichloroisocyanuric acid, dry or Sodium chlorate Dichloroisocyanuric acid salts Sodium chlorate, aqueous solution (PG II and 10. In § 175.10, paragraph (b) is added Didymium nitrate III) to read as follows: 44384 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 20, 1997 / Proposed Rules

§ 175.10 Exceptions. (4) Each cylinder shall be placed in a § 175.10 [Amended] * * * * * metal or plastic overpack which— 11. In addition in § 175.10, in (i) Is capable of meeting the self (b) A cylinder containing compressed paragraph (a)(7) the wording ‘‘a extinguishing requirements of 14 CFR oxygen, belonging to an aircraft operator passenger’’ in the first sentence is 25.853; or a passenger needing the oxygen for (ii) Provides protection to the cylinder revised to read ‘‘an onboard passenger’’ personal medical use at destination, and valves; and paragraph (a)(24) is removed and may be carried in the cabin of a (iii) Is marked ‘‘Oxygen, reserved. passenger-carrying aircraft in Compressed’’, ‘‘UN1072’’, and 12. In § 175.85, paragraph (b) is accordance with procedures approved ‘‘Passenger cabin acceptable per 49 CFR revised to read as follows: by the FAA and specified in the carrier’s 175.10’’; and operations specifications, manual or (iv) Is labeled Cargo Aircraft Only and § 175.85 Cargo location. plan, as appropriate, and the following either Oxygen or Non-Flammable Gas * * * * * provisions: and Oxidizer, in accordance with (b) Each package bearing a Cargo (1) No more than six cylinders subpart D of part 172 of this subchapter; Aircraft Only label or which otherwise (5) The aircraft operator shall securely belonging to the aircraft operator and, in contains a hazardous material stow the overpack in the cabin of the addition, no more than one cylinder acceptable only for cargo aircraft must aircraft in accordance with the (with a rated oxygen capacity of 850 be loaded in such a manner that a crew operator’s operations procedures and liters (30 cubic feet) or less) per member or other authorized person can shall notify the pilot-in-command as passenger needing the oxygen, may be see, handle and when size and weight transported on an aircraft under the specified in § 175.33; and (6) Shipments under this paragraph permit, separate such packages from provisions of paragraph (b); other cargo during flight. (2) Each cylinder must conform to the (b) are not subject to— (i) The prohibition in § 172.101 of this * * * * * provisions of this subchapter with subchapter against carriage of regard to packaging specifications, fill Issued in Washington, DC on August 12, compressed oxygen on passenger- limits, maintenance requirements, 1997, under the authority delegated in 49 carrying aircraft; CFR part 106. marking and labeling; (ii) Subpart C and, for passengers A.I. Roberts, (3) Each cylinder shall be examined only, subpart H of part 172 of this by the aircraft operator to ensure that all subchapter; Associate Administrator for Hazardous valves are closed and the cylinder is free (iii) Section 173.25 of this subchapter; Materials Safety. of flammable contaminants on all or [FR Doc. 97–21739 Filed 8–19–97; 8:45 am] exterior surfaces; (iv) Section 175.85. BILLING CODE 4910±60±P